November 22, 2005

"Did Roger Simon Form a Partnership With Dennis the Peasant?"

Entrepreneurship lawprof Gordon Smith does some analyzing
The story bears a striking resemblance to the facts of Urban Decay, where a California appellate court held that two women who developed ideas for a cosmetics company had formed a partnership.

25 comments:

Meade said...

"Holmes had been reading about 16th century England, and how people with the plague developed purple sores, and she thought the color looked like the plague sores."

purple open plague sores - let's all partner up!

Pablo said...

It's entirely clear that it isn't the same business. DTP relates discussion of an advertising company for bloggers. PJ/OSM, particularly in it's current incarnation, is in the news business.

The burning question is whether you've formed a partnership with DTP.

Ann Althouse said...

Pablo: Ah, yes. Bring on the personal attacks. When you don't have a substantive argument....

The question is whether for the time they were working together, what they had constituted a partnership. The issue isn't whether he's currently in a partnership. If there was a partnership, it's now over. What his remedy would be if a court found a partnership to have existed, I don't know.

For the record, I've never met or spoken to DTP. I'm just being a blogger, doing the blogger thing. I wonder why more people aren't? Why are you, for example, jazzed up about protecting them? If this were an incident concerning MSM, I wonder what the size of the blog storm would be.

MJ said...

It's entirely clear that it isn't the same business. DTP relates discussion of an advertising company for bloggers. PJ/OSM, particularly in it's current incarnation, is in the news business.

That's only because nobody actually knows what PJM/OSM is supposed to be....I'm sure Roger and Charles still have designs on providing advertising for blogs...their OSM site is set up for it. It's purely incompetence that has held them up so far. Roger and Charles sold all of the bloggers there (and attempted with Ann) on the idea of an advertising network, thats pretty close to the project that DTP and the S&C were working on no?

Ann:

Pablo is an LGF'er. Hence his rather lame defence of the project. They can't deal with the fact that their Lizard 'Master' could be so involved in such a monumental balls up.

Ann Althouse said...

Colin: Great point! Maybe their lawyers are telling them they've got to change the plan to make it different enough from what was planned with Dennis. But then what's the point?

AnechoicRoom said...

Not that I'm Sir Speedy ..... (Thank You Very Much). But in case anyone hasn't heard? The PJM Death Pool is borne.

And just in case my html is as bad as I know it is?
http://pjmdeathpool.blogspot.com/

AnechoicRoom said...

Now that's funny.

DennisThePeasant said...

Being but a simple Peasant, all I can say is this:

1) In my non-legally trained eyes, the concept/business model for Tulip Advertising bears no resemblence to whatever Pajamas Media is supposed to be.

2) I will take legal action against anyone who suggests I had anything to do with making Pajamas Media what it is today. I've been called every name in the book over the past week, but a man has to draw a line somewhere...

jakemanjack said...

If OSM/PJM is tantamount to the titanic, why would Dennis the peasant care?

Sue a sinking ship?

Sounds like yet another round of envy on the Love-boat.

I hope PJM is wildly successful for Roger and Charles and everyone else involved.
I hope its successful even if it the site is as terrible as its critics say, simply to torture Dennis and Ann.
Ha ha!

DennisThePeasant said...

Oh no, Ann.

jakemanjake has figured us out.

Now what?

DennisThePeasant said...

Oops.

jakemanjack.

Wouldn't want to be accused of his his reading comprehension level.

DennisThePeasant said...

I didn't make the varsity typing team either.

Charlie (Colorado) said...

Bottom line, quote: "Every corporation or LLC is preceded by some planning, but such planning does not necessarily result in the formation of a partnership."

Dennis, I've got nothing against you: if you think there qwas a partnership formed, then sue Roger. The way things are going, though, I wonder if you're not simply setting yourself up to either be sued by Roger, or to arrange things so that you'd lose a suit from general misconduct.

the illavator said...

Complaining about getting fucked in the ass is "general misconduct"? That's a new one on me, Charlie.

none said...

Charlie/Jakemanjack,

All is forgiven.

Trying so hard only makes it worse. As it says at the sign-in to the comment section: "Choose an identity." Singular. Not plural.

Oh what a tangled, transparent web you have weaved.

none said...

These last few days. (Or, when feeling outnumbered, is this a technique of long standing?)

none said...

Congratulations Seneca the Younger/Charlie/Jakemanjack, another link from Roger himself.

Two in three days. Not that I blame him of course, good post I'm sure.

DennisThePeasant said...

Charlie-

A week ago your questions would have made sense. That you are asking them today simply tells me you haven't taken the time or made the effort to read what I have been saying about this.

My anger with RLS has nothing to do with being "cut out" of Pajamas Media. Pajamas Media as it stands today bears no relationship to the business concept we had when discussing Tulip Advertising. And I have made that quite clear.

I am angry at Roger L. Simon because, at every possible turn, he chose to deal with me in an unethical and personally dishonest manner. And I have been quite clear about that, too.

Had RLS come to me at the appropriate time and explained he was going in a different direction and with a different crew, my reaction would have been no different than Marc Danzinger's. But RLS didn't choose to do that.

When I wrote and posted "The 'Certain Thing'", I invited the blogosphere to compare 'Certain Thing' to RLS's "This is so High School". The blogosphere has, and it appears to be clear what the reaction has been.

Had my grievances with RLS rang untrue or petty in my post, you would not be asking what you are asking. I don't know what else to say to you, other than:

It's very easy to stand around saying "turn the over cheek" when your cheek isn't involved.

none said...

Charlie/Seneca the Younger/Jakemanjack said:

"Dennis, I've got nothing against you..."

But you called the Peasant a "Pissant" over at Roger's. Dennis was very hurt. Didn't you read Roger's post "Words." Words hurt. Of course, Roger's wife was busy calling Dennis a rapist/arsonist in the in the comments to hubby's post (scroll down) and in other places. I guess the Simon's own more than one computer.

DennisThePeasant said...

Sarah-

Let's be fair. Sheryl Longin/Simon didn't call me an rapist/arsonist, she compared me to an rapist/arsonist. That's completely different and much less hurtful, word-wise.

none said...

Dennis,

After posting that I noticed my choice of words had been too harsh. But since I had been monopolizing the thread I was reluctant to post again. So thanks for making that important point. Let me remind you also that the man she compared you to has yet to be convicted (or captured?), so it really was just a lot of conjecture. I also wrote, "Dennis was very hurt." I do not know this as a fact. Thus I should've have written, "Dennis might well have been very hurt by those words, delicate flower that he is."

DennisThePeasant said...

Sarah-

LOL.

Indeed. I am a delicate f**king flower.

Pablo said...

Ann says:
Pablo: Ah, yes. Bring on the personal attacks. When you don't have a substantive argument....

Personal attack? Please don't tell me that you're so fragile that you find a suggestion of collaboration between yourself and DTP, who seems quite handy around here, to be a personal attack.

You're still an attorney, no? You understand the value of using terms in accordance with their definitions, no?

Having said that, you seem to have a deep emotional investment in the issue. It's amusing to watch. That's not an attack, merely an observation of the obvious.

As for the substantive argument that I provided and you ignored, let's refer to Gordon Smith, to whom you linked:
The key inquiry: Is Pajamas Media a different business than the one envisioned during those early talks between Simon, Kelly, and Johnson?

It is clearly not the same business. I think Dennis has done a fine job of making that clear. Now, would you like to discuss that, or would you prefer to simply dismiss me as a misoginist for my failure to support your position?

Why are you, for example, jazzed up about protecting them?

Would you care to define that? I've made a couple of comments on the situation. You've made a calling of chronicling it with the vitriol that comes from having been "disrespected", much like DTP.

If this were an incident concerning MSM, I wonder what the size of the blog storm would be.

What exactly is the nature of the "incident" you're referring to? We seem to be discussing a dispute, not an incident.

It's a startup. There are going to be screwups. that's the nature of startups. To call the thing a failure upon it's birth is akin to calling the war in Iraq a failure because it wasn't over in 30 days. Sure, you can see it that way if you like, but history may well make you look foolish.

Predict at your own risk.

P.S. to Colin: That's me. Neocon warmonger Bush-worshipping redneck Islamophobe. Do you think I'd have a shot with the likes of a Berkely house whore? Broadbrushing is such fun!

MJ said...

P.S. to Colin: That's me. Neocon warmonger Bush-worshipping redneck Islamophobe

That wasn't what I was objecting to. As a Lizard you are in no position to take a moral stand on character assasinations and personal attacks. LGF is one big schoolyard. So for the kiddies over there to complain about people being mean is a tad hypocritical.

PS If Charles wasn't involved would you read OSM...Pajamas? Or go straight to the bloggers you know? Perhaps someone somewhere has a need to read AP headlines (outside AP) and official Communist party propaganda.....but I don't, and I'm sure people like you don't either.

Pablo said...

So for the kiddies over there to complain about people being mean is a tad hypocritical.

Colin, if you'd like to quote me, do so. If not, then stop pretending you're talking about me. You're making a fool of yourself.